Another thing factoring into my decision is that I like the topic area in law more than accounting. There is value in doing something you would enjoy more. It would be awesome if we could all just to a cost-benefit analysis with different salaries and different probabilities, but life isn't that simple.

birdlaw117 wrote:Another thing factoring into my decision is that I like the topic area in law more than accounting. There is value in doing something you would enjoy more. It would be awesome if we could all just to a cost-benefit analysis with different salaries and different probabilities, but life isn't that simple.

Not speaking from personal experience but I can say from friends who are in biglaw that the ones I know at least don't find it fulfilling at all even when they are making 170k+.

birdlaw117 wrote:Another thing factoring into my decision is that I like the topic area in law more than accounting. There is value in doing something you would enjoy more. It would be awesome if we could all just to a cost-benefit analysis with different salaries and different probabilities, but life isn't that simple.

Not speaking from personal experience but I can say from friends who are in biglaw that the ones I know at least don't find it fulfilling at all even when they are making 170k+.

Big law and accounting are both fields for sell-outs who aren't looking to contribute real value to society. We don't produce tangible goods or design new technologies. We just enable the decisions of people who have a vision. They both crush you with hours. Big law pays a lot more than the other and doesn't make you spend half the year living in a Holiday Inn. That's the difference. All the other differences between working at an accounting firm and a law firm are cosmetic. If the debate is accounting versus law, then job satisfaction isn't going to be a tie breaker for one or the other.

birdlaw117 wrote:Another thing factoring into my decision is that I like the topic area in law more than accounting. There is value in doing something you would enjoy more. It would be awesome if we could all just to a cost-benefit analysis with different salaries and different probabilities, but life isn't that simple.

Not speaking from personal experience but I can say from friends who are in biglaw that the ones I know at least don't find it fulfilling at all even when they are making 170k+.

Big law and accounting are both fields for sell-outs who aren't looking to contribute real value to society. We don't produce tangible goods or design new technologies. We just enable the decisions of people who have a vision. They both crush you with hours. Big law pays a lot more than the other and doesn't make you spend half the year living in a Holiday Inn. That's the difference. All the other differences between working at an accounting firm and a law firm are cosmetic. If the debate is accounting versus law, then job satisfaction isn't going to be a tie breaker for one or the other.

birdlaw117 wrote:Another thing factoring into my decision is that I like the topic area in law more than accounting. There is value in doing something you would enjoy more. It would be awesome if we could all just to a cost-benefit analysis with different salaries and different probabilities, but life isn't that simple.

Not speaking from personal experience but I can say from friends who are in biglaw that the ones I know at least don't find it fulfilling at all even when they are making 170k+.

Big law and accounting are both fields for sell-outs who aren't looking to contribute real value to society. We don't produce tangible goods or design new technologies. We just enable the decisions of people who have a vision. They both crush you with hours. Big law pays a lot more than the other and doesn't make you spend half the year living in a Holiday Inn. That's the difference. All the other differences between working at an accounting firm and a law firm are cosmetic. If the debate is accounting versus law, then job satisfaction isn't going to be a tie breaker for one or the other.

And here all this time I thought biglaw was about giving large companies the legal support they need to put new strategies and ideas into action and prevent their wealth from being leached away in litigation. Foolish me.

birdlaw117 wrote:Another thing factoring into my decision is that I like the topic area in law more than accounting. There is value in doing something you would enjoy more. It would be awesome if we could all just to a cost-benefit analysis with different salaries and different probabilities, but life isn't that simple.

Not speaking from personal experience but I can say from friends who are in biglaw that the ones I know at least don't find it fulfilling at all even when they are making 170k+.

Big law and accounting are both fields for sell-outs who aren't looking to contribute real value to society. We don't produce tangible goods or design new technologies. We just enable the decisions of people who have a vision. They both crush you with hours. Big law pays a lot more than the other and doesn't make you spend half the year living in a Holiday Inn. That's the difference. All the other differences between working at an accounting firm and a law firm are cosmetic. If the debate is accounting versus law, then job satisfaction isn't going to be a tie breaker for one or the other.

And here all this time I thought biglaw was about giving large companies the legal support they need to put new strategies and ideas into action and prevent their wealth from being leached away in litigation. Foolish me.

I think you're forgetting the part where I said lawyers and accountants "enable the decisions of people who have a vision."

I don't understand what your deal is with attacking my posts by saying the exact same things I said in a different way. You do it a lot. It's confusing is all.

Last edited by robotclubmember on Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Not speaking from personal experience but I can say from friends who are in biglaw that the ones I know at least don't find it fulfilling at all even when they are making 170k+.[/quote]

Big law and accounting are both fields for sell-outs who aren't looking to contribute real value to society. We don't produce tangible goods or design new technologies. We just enable the decisions of people who have a vision. They both crush you with hours. Big law pays a lot more than the other and doesn't make you spend half the year living in a Holiday Inn. That's the difference. All the other differences between working at an accounting firm and a law firm are cosmetic. If the debate is accounting versus law, then job satisfaction isn't going to be a tie breaker for one or the other.[/quote]

And here all this time I thought biglaw was about giving large companies the legal support they need to put new strategies and ideas into action and prevent their wealth from being leached away in litigation. Foolish me.[/quote]

I think you're forgetting the part where I said lawyers and accountants "enable the decisions of people who have a vision."

I don't understand what your deal is with attacking my posts by saying the exact same things I said in a different way. You do it a lot. It's confusing is all.[/quote]

I hoped that by phrasing things differently, you would see the "real value" that lawyers contribute.

I see the value. The statement was a response to the lack of job satisfaction, in both fields. It's well known people don't usually like working in accounting or law firms. The culture is a part of it, the hours is another part, and the vast separation between your work and the good it does for society is also a factor I believe.

Fundamentally, I understand that there is value to attesting to the fairness and accuracy of financial statements and the operating effectiveness of an org's internal control environment. But the reality is that it often feels like I'm documenting a control for the sake of being able to say I did it. It gets briefly looked at and filed away where it will only see the light of day again seven years later when it is being shredded. That's the reality of the work we do. It has to be done, and I philosophically understand why it needs to be done, but when you're a foot soldier, you get discouraged by the lack of real value it adds to society. Auditors exist only because companies lie. Job satisfaction is a serious issue, and there are reasons why. The work feels like paper-pushing a lot of times.

robotclubmember wrote:I see the value. The statement was a response to the lack of job satisfaction, in both fields. It's well known people don't usually like working in accounting or law firms. The culture is a part of it, the hours is another part, and the vast separation between your work and the good it does for society is also a factor I believe.

Fundamentally, I understand that there is value to attesting to the fairness and accuracy of financial statements and the operating effectiveness of an org's internal control environment. But the reality is that it often feels like I'm documenting a control for the sake of being able to say I did it. It gets briefly looked at and filed away where it will only see the light of day again seven years later when it is being shredded. That's the reality of the work we do. It has to be done, and I philosophically understand why it needs to be done, but when you're a foot soldier, you get discouraged by the lack of real value it adds to society. Auditors exist only because companies lie. Job satisfaction is a serious issue, and there are reasons why. The work feels like paper-pushing a lot of times.

birdlaw117 wrote:Another thing factoring into my decision is that I like the topic area in law more than accounting. There is value in doing something you would enjoy more. It would be awesome if we could all just to a cost-benefit analysis with different salaries and different probabilities, but life isn't that simple.

Not speaking from personal experience but I can say from friends who are in biglaw that the ones I know at least don't find it fulfilling at all even when they are making 170k+.

Big law and accounting are both fields for sell-outs who aren't looking to contribute real value to society. We don't produce tangible goods or design new technologies. We just enable the decisions of people who have a vision. They both crush you with hours. Big law pays a lot more than the other and doesn't make you spend half the year living in a Holiday Inn. That's the difference. All the other differences between working at an accounting firm and a law firm are cosmetic. If the debate is accounting versus law, then job satisfaction isn't going to be a tie breaker for one or the other.

If that's your definition of a sell out, I'd say 90%+ of society fits into it.

robotclubmember wrote:I see the value. The statement was a response to the lack of job satisfaction, in both fields. It's well known people don't usually like working in accounting or law firms. The culture is a part of it, the hours is another part, and the vast separation between your work and the good it does for society is also a factor I believe.

Fundamentally, I understand that there is value to attesting to the fairness and accuracy of financial statements and the operating effectiveness of an org's internal control environment. But the reality is that it often feels like I'm documenting a control for the sake of being able to say I did it. It gets briefly looked at and filed away where it will only see the light of day again seven years later when it is being shredded. That's the reality of the work we do. It has to be done, and I philosophically understand why it needs to be done, but when you're a foot soldier, you get discouraged by the lack of real value it adds to society. Auditors exist only because companies lie. Job satisfaction is a serious issue, and there are reasons why. The work feels like paper-pushing a lot of times.

Have you ever really worked in a firm?

Huh? I've never been in accounting.

Yes, job satisfaction can be low in both law and (I presume) accounting. At least on the legal side, this is because biglaw tends to attract idealistic young things who want to save the whales and then chase the $.

Biglaw is kinda like the anti-PI, but, depending on what your worldview is, that could be what makes it worth doing.

Edit: Or maybe its just that me and all of my friends who are in biglaw are terribly evil people, always a possibility.

Any firm.Have you worked at any firm? Even as an intern. Though I'd argue that interning doesn't count. The experience is totally different. As an intern you're treated like a star and get paid for overtime. You know you're going back to school soon too. Once they have you hooked on salary, once you're a full-time employee and there is no more school, life is different. I'm just curious what your contribution is. I'm a CPA so I have a real perspective to share in this thread and I'm sharing it. I was wondering what yours was is all.

Now to rant, tl;dr this unless your bored cos it doesn't have to do with law v. acctg...

To FiveSermon... big four and big law people are special kinds of sell-outs. What I will say is that the quality of people in these jobs is very high, intellectually speaking (let's not talk about ethics). It adds a lot to your life to be working around smart people all the time. You are who you're around, that's the nature of social contagion, and going into big four made me smarter. I'm just trying to be realistic. That said, we should know better. I'm not sure what 90% you are talking about. At the end of the day, I sometimes felt that the janitor had a more important role in society than I did. At least at the end of the day, the refuse was cleared. I could see she had added value. It was hard to say what I had really done in a day sometimes, even if I had been working hard and had been mentally stimulated all day. But let's assume you count that janitor as a sell-out. I mean, she's just an immigrant trying to survive. People in big law and big four are smart enough to truly assess our role in society though, on a philosophical level. We know that our intelligence could be used for more than maintaining a system that disproportionately allocates wealth to those who understand all the fake rules that an old guy wrote on a page in nineteen-sixty-whatever. If what we did really mattered, we would like our jobs. Like I said, the entire field of audit is based on the reality that companies lie and/or investors can't trust them. The audit role is important. But a Watson-esque audit-bot could have been built by now and wiped out the need for half of the auditors, if the people that crowded these fields for a quick buck applied their intelligence differently. Then we could move on to other challenges.

I know I'm a sell-out to and I'm not denying it. But we do owe it to ourselves to be honest about what it is. Quick money doing a job that often times could have been made obsolete years ago. MIT engineering majors realized a long time ago that they could make a lot more money trading stocks (aka generating wealth by moving money from one place to another) than they would by actually going into engineering and like, solving real problems, man. That's the kind of sell-out I'm talking about, the kind that we are, not the immigrant janitor who has mouths to feed.

Last edited by robotclubmember on Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Any firm. Even as an intern. Though I'd argue that interning doesn't count. The experience is totally different. As an intern you're treated like a star and get paid for overtime. You know you're going back to school soon too. Once they have you hooked on salary, once you're a full-time employee and there is no more school, life is different.

I'm just curious what your contribution is. I'm a CPA so I have a real perspective to share in this thread and I'm sharing it. I was wondering what yours was is all.

And to FiveSermon... big four and big law people are special kinds of sell-outs. What I will say is that the quality of people in these jobs is very high, intellectually speaking (let's not talk about ethics). It adds a lot to your life to be working around smart people all the time. You are who you're around, that's the nature of social contagion, and going into big four made me smarter. I'm just trying to be realistic. That said, we should know better. I'm not sure what 90% you are talking about. At the end of the day, I sometimes felt that the janitor had a more important role in society than I did. At least at the end of the day, the refuse was cleared. It was hard to say what I had really done in a day sometimes, even if I had been working hard and had been mentally stimulated all day. But let's assume you count that janitor as a sell-out. I mean, she's just an immigrant trying to survive. People in big law and big four are smart enough to truly assess our role in society though, on a philosophical level. We know that our intelligence could be used for more than maintaining a system that disproportionately allocates wealth to those who understand all the fake rules that an old guy wrote on a page in nineteen-sixty-whatever. If what we did really mattered, we would like our jobs. Like I said, the entire field of audit is based on the reality that companies lie and/or investors can't trust them. The audit role is important. But a Watson-esque audit-bot could have been built by now and wiped out the need for half of the auditors, if the people that crowded these fields for a quick buck applied their intelligence differently. Then we could move on to other tasks.

I know I'm a sell-out to and I'm not denying it. But we do owe it to ourselves to be honest about what it is. Quick money doing a job that often times could have been made obsolete years ago. MIT engineering majors realized a long time ago that they could make a lot more money trading stocks (aka generating wealth by moving money from one place to another) than they would by actually going into engineering and like, solving real problems, man. That's the kind of sell-out I'm talking about, the kind that we are, not the immigrant janitor who has mouths to feed.

This is horrible. I guess the doctor saving kids dying of TB in Haiti should be judged by being around poor starving disease ridden illiterate children while the socialite who spends all his days attempting to kiss ass is the better person.

Any firm. Even as an intern. Though I'd argue that interning doesn't count. The experience is totally different. As an intern you're treated like a star and get paid for overtime. You know you're going back to school soon too. Once they have you hooked on salary, once you're a full-time employee and there is no more school, life is different.

I'm just curious what your contribution is. I'm a CPA so I have a real perspective to share in this thread and I'm sharing it. I was wondering what yours was is all.

And to FiveSermon... big four and big law people are special kinds of sell-outs. What I will say is that the quality of people in these jobs is very high, intellectually speaking (let's not talk about ethics). It adds a lot to your life to be working around smart people all the time. You are who you're around, that's the nature of social contagion, and going into big four made me smarter. I'm just trying to be realistic. That said, we should know better. I'm not sure what 90% you are talking about. At the end of the day, I sometimes felt that the janitor had a more important role in society than I did. At least at the end of the day, the refuse was cleared. It was hard to say what I had really done in a day sometimes, even if I had been working hard and had been mentally stimulated all day. But let's assume you count that janitor as a sell-out. I mean, she's just an immigrant trying to survive. People in big law and big four are smart enough to truly assess our role in society though, on a philosophical level. We know that our intelligence could be used for more than maintaining a system that disproportionately allocates wealth to those who understand all the fake rules that an old guy wrote on a page in nineteen-sixty-whatever. If what we did really mattered, we would like our jobs. Like I said, the entire field of audit is based on the reality that companies lie and/or investors can't trust them. The audit role is important. But a Watson-esque audit-bot could have been built by now and wiped out the need for half of the auditors, if the people that crowded these fields for a quick buck applied their intelligence differently. Then we could move on to other tasks.

I know I'm a sell-out to and I'm not denying it. But we do owe it to ourselves to be honest about what it is. Quick money doing a job that often times could have been made obsolete years ago. MIT engineering majors realized a long time ago that they could make a lot more money trading stocks (aka generating wealth by moving money from one place to another) than they would by actually going into engineering and like, solving real problems, man. That's the kind of sell-out I'm talking about, the kind that we are, not the immigrant janitor who has mouths to feed.

This is horrible. I guess the doctor saving kids dying of TB in Haiti should be judged by being around poor starving disease ridden illiterate children while the socialite who spends all his days attempting to kiss ass is the better person.

Then we're on the same page. My point is, the socialite shouldn't be rewarded. The doctor should be. Why aren't you going to be the doctor in Haiti? Oh, because it doesn't pay enough. Enjoy big law. If we knew our jobs helped people, we wouldn't hate them.

EDIT - I just saw what you did there. Social contagion is reality, I didn't make it so. I didn't say anything about judging people. Nice straw man. Thank you for cherry-picking a tiny component of my overall statement and making a useless and illogical observation about it.

Then we're on the same page. My point is, the socialite shouldn't be rewarded. The doctor should be. Why aren't you going to be the doctor in Haiti? Oh, because it doesn't pay enough. Enjoy big law. If we knew our jobs helped people, we wouldn't hate them.

What? I think you misinterpreted me. I'm saying not to judge someone by their jobs or by the company they keep.

Also maybe I missed something. Tbh I didn't get past the bolded part in the wall of text.

Any firm.Have you worked at any firm? Even as an intern. Though I'd argue that interning doesn't count. The experience is totally different. As an intern you're treated like a star and get paid for overtime. You know you're going back to school soon too. Once they have you hooked on salary, once you're a full-time employee and there is no more school, life is different. I'm just curious what your contribution is. I'm a CPA so I have a real perspective to share in this thread and I'm sharing it. I was wondering what yours was is all.

Now to rant, tl;dr this unless your bored cos it doesn't have to do with law v. acctg...

To FiveSermon... big four and big law people are special kinds of sell-outs. What I will say is that the quality of people in these jobs is very high, intellectually speaking (let's not talk about ethics). It adds a lot to your life to be working around smart people all the time. You are who you're around, that's the nature of social contagion, and going into big four made me smarter. I'm just trying to be realistic. That said, we should know better. I'm not sure what 90% you are talking about. At the end of the day, I sometimes felt that the janitor had a more important role in society than I did. At least at the end of the day, the refuse was cleared. I could see she had added value. It was hard to say what I had really done in a day sometimes, even if I had been working hard and had been mentally stimulated all day. But let's assume you count that janitor as a sell-out. I mean, she's just an immigrant trying to survive. People in big law and big four are smart enough to truly assess our role in society though, on a philosophical level. We know that our intelligence could be used for more than maintaining a system that disproportionately allocates wealth to those who understand all the fake rules that an old guy wrote on a page in nineteen-sixty-whatever. If what we did really mattered, we would like our jobs. Like I said, the entire field of audit is based on the reality that companies lie and/or investors can't trust them. The audit role is important. But a Watson-esque audit-bot could have been built by now and wiped out the need for half of the auditors, if the people that crowded these fields for a quick buck applied their intelligence differently. Then we could move on to other challenges.

I know I'm a sell-out to and I'm not denying it. But we do owe it to ourselves to be honest about what it is. Quick money doing a job that often times could have been made obsolete years ago. MIT engineering majors realized a long time ago that they could make a lot more money trading stocks (aka generating wealth by moving money from one place to another) than they would by actually going into engineering and like, solving real problems, man. That's the kind of sell-out I'm talking about, the kind that we are, not the immigrant janitor who has mouths to feed.

I have never worked for any accounting firm in any capacity.

What does this have to do with anything? If I have to be from an accounting background to comment on law vs accounting, how can you, as someone not even in law school, rationalize commenting on the same.

Last edited by Veyron on Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Veyron wrote: I have never worked for any accounting firm in any capacity.

What does this have to do with anything? If I have to be from an accounting background to comment on law vs accounting, how can you, as someone not even in law school, rationalize doing commenting on the same.

Have you worked for ANY firm in ANY capacity is what I'm asking. Like, a law firm for example?

Being in law school doesn't qualify you to share opinions about working in big law. Working in big law qualifies you. I've openly acknowledged my blind spots and limited specific insights to accounting. That's one side of the table. I'm offering a perspective to compliment other perspectives, bro. The difference between us is I have WE as a CPA, so I can at least draw comparisons and talk about the part I know about. You don't have WE in big four or big law. I never said I was 100%. I'm 50%. You're 0%. This is a thread about working.

Veyron wrote: I have never worked for any accounting firm in any capacity.

What does this have to do with anything? If I have to be from an accounting background to comment on law vs accounting, how can you, as someone not even in law school, rationalize doing commenting on the same.

Have you worked for ANY firm in ANY capacity is what I'm asking. Like, a law firm for example?

Being in law school doesn't qualify you to share opinions about working in big law. Working in big law qualifies you. I've openly acknowledged my blind spots and limited specific insights to accounting. That's one side of the table. I'm offering a perspective to compliment other perspectives, bro. The difference between us is I have WE as a CPA, so I can at least draw comparisons and talk about the part I know about. You don't have WE in big four or big law. I never said I was 100%. I'm 50%. You're 0%. This is a thread about working.

This may surprise you then, but the vast majority of companies aren't called "firms." If you want to know have I worked, the answer would be yes.

In addition, I have access to reams of hard data on hiring by virtue of being a law student that lets me comment much more intelligently on legal hiring than you can on accounting hiring. Penn career services discourages us from discussing it directly but you can be sure that it informs my posts.

I also know what motivates at least some biglawyers since I'm acquainted with many present and former ones.

Last edited by Veyron on Sun Feb 20, 2011 9:05 pm, edited 4 times in total.

By the way, I'm not trying to be a dickhead. Well I am. But I recently switched my keyboard to dvorak and told myself I needed to spend three hours typing tonight for practice. Sorry to clutter this thread with the BS, but I hope my earlier posts re: big four partner promotions, applying law school credits to the CPA requirement, clarifying purpose of the CPA, salary and travel info, etc., were helpful to someone.